Case File
efta-02451626DOJ Data Set 11OtherEFTA02451626
Date
Unknown
Source
DOJ Data Set 11
Reference
efta-02451626
Pages
2
Persons
0
Integrity
Extracted Text (OCR)
Text extracted via OCR from the original document. May contain errors from the scanning process.
From:
on behalf of Ben Goertzel
Sent:
Monday, September 5, 2016 4:30 PM
To:
jeffrey E.
Subject:
Re: Emergence of Chomskyan "deep syntactic structure" via probabilistic inference
To pose it in a question form, hmmm....
I guess one could say
"It seems that, using a probabilistic-logic-based learning system, one obtains a system that LEARNS the deep syntactic
structure of a sentence, as an intermediate result DURING THE PROCESS OF learning surface syntactic structure based
on comparison of sentences with
their non-linguistic referents. This is because deep syntactic
structures often share more symmetries and patterns with the logical structure of sentences' non-linguistic referents
So a question would be: How could one tell, from the mere presence of deep syntactic structures as patterns in
language, whether (or the extent to which) such structures are innate in the brain versus created in the course of
learning (created due to their natural structural role as intermediaries between deep semantic structure and surface
syntactic structure)?"
Well that's kind of complicated, but these are not trivial matters I guess..
The case in point is that if one wants a system to learn the surface structure
"Who did Ben tickle?"
based on a nonlinguistic referent that has logical structure
tickle(Ben, ?)
then the probabilistic logic system will, in the course of learning, automatically construct
Ben did tickle who?
as part of its surface-syntax-learning process..
-- Ben
Regarding,
> i think he might ask , what happens with ben is tickling sue who is
> being ticked by bob while he is being tickled by both
EFTA_R1_01551213
EFTA02451626
-- of course that's a more complex case that requires more inference steps to handle, but since my approach is logic-
based, it doesn't have any problem with recursive constructs.... Recursive constructs are a problem for typical statistical
methods, which don't involve general abstract knowledge representation (just markov chains; or hierarchical patterns
with a fixed depth as in a typical deep neural net).... But probabilistic logic incorporates the "frequency counting" aspect
of statistical methods, AND the general abstract knowledge representation of logical methods (so it can represent
languages all the way up the good old "Chomsky formal language hierarchy"...) <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<!DOCTYPE plist PUBLIC "-//Apple//DTD PLIST 1.0//EN" "http://www.apple.com/DTDs/Propertylist-1.0.dtd">
<plist version="1.0">
<dict>
<key>conversation-id</key>
<integer>70236</integer>
<key>date-last-viewed</key>
<integer>0</integer>
<key>date-received</key>
<integer>1473093013</integer>
<key>flags</key>
<integer>8690195713</integer>
<key>gmail-label-ids</key>
<array>
<integer>6</integer>
<integer>2</integer>
</array>
<key>remote-id</key>
<string>641860</string>
</dict>
</plist>
2
EFTA_R1_01551214
EFTA02451627
Technical Artifacts (5)
View in Artifacts BrowserEmail addresses, URLs, phone numbers, and other technical indicators extracted from this document.
Phone
2451626Phone
2451627Phone
3093013URL
http://www.apple.com/DTDs/Propertylist-1.0.dtdWire Ref
referentsRelated Documents (6)
DOJ Data Set 11OtherUnknown
EFTA02499157
2p
DOJ Data Set 10OtherUnknown
EFTA02121328
1p
DOJ Data Set 9OtherUnknown
Creating Intelligent Humanoid Robots
10p
DOJ Data Set 9OtherUnknown
Science Philanthropist, Jeffrey Epstein, Backs the First Free Thinking Robots
2p
DOJ Data Set 10CorrespondenceUnknown
EFTA Document EFTA01756518
0p
DOJ Data Set 11OtherUnknown
EFTA02573952
1p
Forum Discussions
This document was digitized, indexed, and cross-referenced with 1,400+ persons in the Epstein files. 100% free, ad-free, and independent.
Annotations powered by Hypothesis. Select any text on this page to annotate or highlight it.